The Syndicate

Hawkeye wrote:So basically Exodus, you seem to have received the same piece of information from the Night 1 poll as SC. She used that in order to deduce that you might be bad, so she tried to build a case which reeks of confirmation bias (which I find normal since there's not a lot to work with in your case). Why didn't you make the same assumption about her in the first place? After Dazzler died, you chose to focus on Domino, with no mention of SC whatsoever. You still seem to feel reluctant in making a more than a 'NO U' case against her. Can you explain this?

Just to clarify, I've talked about this. So in case I am not able to be back before deadline I hope that people will look at what I've written.
I did not come in with my guns blazing at Shadowcat for multiple reasons. First, Epi asked us not to info dump, and I assumed it was against the rules so I wasn't going to build a case on Shadowcat out of no where when she had not posted in some time because that just looks like I have information so I was going to approach by the wait and see method. See if when she posted I felt bad or good about her. Unlike what everyone is saying, that it should be obvious, I think about the aspect of things being too obvious. Why on earth would the mafia want to narrow down the list to two, when that would obviously expose one of their brotherhood members? It doesn't make sense, it's stupid to me. So it felt too easy to me to have a huge confidence level. Obviously, I was going to be concerned and looking into Shadowcat but the last time I took the route of assessing things too much, I made a mistake (with T-bird). You're right I focused on Domino, honestly, SC wasn't posting and the scumminess at that point of time caught my eye (I don't understand how people are not seeing it). I intended to change my vote if I needed to.

I started the game suspecting Mojo. He grew quiet, and so naturally, I didn't talk about it as much and saw Thunderbirds vote as suspicious, and if Shadowcat were to actually analyze his vote and that he voted for White Queen, she might see some logic in that and why I found him suspicious, although I did not come out and say it. I obviously was wrong, and I have no excuse for that. Last minute I saw that QS had tried to do what I considered an emotional appeal and talked about him a bit. When he had too many votes, I remembered the only time I'd seen all the votes in one place and noted how that ended badly and I looked elsewhere. I was suspicious of people for littler things such as Vision and Havok but I do not consider that jumping around or convenient. I consider it scumhunting. I thought there were more solid things on Phoenix and Sunfire and I went with those. I never dropped those, either but I do think Domino made a flatout contradiction that I do not see civvies making and so I suspected her.

There, that's what I did. I do not see how this means I am scum. So I have had numerous suspicions, but it's called playing the game. I would play a mafia game and keep my suspect list narrow, that means I am missing something.

The Vision wrote:

Exodus wrote: But why do I have to be the scum? Because she presented information first? Just because she presented something first does not mean she is good, so why are people treating it like it does?

You DO jump from suspect to suspect quite frequently thtu your posts. A handy way to find a baddie is often to find the person who has named the most people as suspect in the game.

Could this be a crazy gambit on scs part? Sure, but I think its worth trying. I want to think on what she said about number of optimal votes etc though...

There's no way for you to know this, but that is how I play. Have you never seen civvies with multiple suspicions? And what does jump mean? Because if you are saying I suspect someone and then drop them, that is not the case. How many suspects do you have?!? Are you jumping around with them? I'm sure your answer would be no.

White Queen wrote:

The Vision wrote:

White Queen wrote:I agree, infodumping sucks. But it is what it is.

Do we believe what she is saying?

I think so, yes. I do. If I'm reading into this properly, the only way its wrong is if Dazzler were bad and the baddies somehow killed her, and I don't believe that, so I think sc is right. Exodus needed to get out on this first...

All right then, this IS distasteful. But giant shit bomb or not, we must lynch someone. I believe her as well, so I am going to vote for Exodus.

This is a crappy way for him to go, but what has been said cannot be unsaid.

But why do I have to be the scum? Because she presented information first? Just because she presented something first does not mean she is good, so why are people treating it like it does?

Shadowcat wrote:I can understand you suspecting multiple people. But like I said before, I feel like you've jumped around when it isn't convenient/wise for you to stick to the same people. I feel like you're intentionally trying to cast wide net over other civvies to get them lynched.

If it seems like overkill, that's because it's how I normally build cases against people. I tend to overload with enormous amounts of information if I'm really convinced they're bad. Which is where I am with you. But my case isn't being forced in the slightest. If it was, I would be putting in the minimum effort I could get away with.

I disagree that my suspicion has been convenient and I with your use of the term convenient. I think you're using it far too loosely, apparently if I am having a discussion with someone and I say something along the lines of I will wait and see or say that I didn't realize they were talking in the context of a certain situation, I am being convenient. How is that just not taking all things into consideration or not just stopping a pointless argument and waiting to see if my suspicion disappears or strengthens over time? How is seeing a post that I find suspicious, let it be about emotions or about contradictions, convenient? It's playing the game and not focusing one one solid subject and I see nothing wrong with that and don't understand how someone opposes that view. If you think it's convenient, fine, but you cannot expect me to explore suspicions at certain times because it would be too convenient. I don't get that logic.

I also am not sure if you're understanding the way I used forced. If you were forcing a case, wouldn't you want to make sure there was enough to convince people rather than doing the minimal? I don't buy that you would be doing the minimal if you were scum in this situation, because it would be a very dangerous and panicking situation. The fact that you say this adds to my worries. I truly do not see your perspective. And just to clarify, I was saying forced as in, does not feel genuine, trying too hard, which is how it feels and how I feel a scum would approach this.

Shadowcat wrote:

Exodus wrote: I understand how she is coming to these conclusions. However, I was not as sure of her baddieness because I felt that the kill last night was rather suicidal and idiotic for the scum to make so I felt like something was going on behind the scenes that isn't as clear cut. But the more she posts, the more I feel like she is trying too hard to make her case feel like it has some sort of support within the thread. People are saying her post is solid, but I don't see it. I see it as spinning everything I say as bad. What is solid about that? Which is why I have now voted her.

Dazzler being NKed instead of being lynched is the only part of my case that would make me wonder. But the fact that The Brotherhood attempted to kill her makes my concerns null and void. The only way I could be totally wrong here is if Sabertooth had his NK redirected. And if that happened, than my entire case on you is potentially incorrect. Although even then, I could still be right. So idk.

I think I'm just confusing myself now. So I'll stop with that one.

And again, part of the reason I did not do this hardcore flipping that you expected was because I was considering everything, which I do not believe you are. Do you seriously not realize how suicidal this would be of me if I were scum? It would doom me. There is nothing positive coming out of that.

And I also believe in having multiple suspicions and exploring each of them.

Sunfire wrote:This sums up my thoughts mostly.

Shadowcat wrote:
You know, Exodus, you've been really good so far about jumping around and casting blame, but never fully committing to or sticking to one person for any extended period of time. I'm surprised you went this long before I noticed it.

And I think there is a good chance that Exodus and Havok are teammates.

And to tell everyone who I feel good about...I am most certain that Avalanche, Hawkeye, and Banshee are good and in that order.

How I play is go by what I find most suspicious. If I find something suspicious, then what? I am not supposed to follow that? I stand by whatever I feel is my strongest lead at that moment in time. If people don't understand the way I play, there is not much else I can do. I don't understand why I would stick to a suspicion, such as Mojo, when there are scummier people doing scummier things. I will focus that because I feel lynching the scummier players is going to get the best result.

White Queen wrote:Making a case to back info is not overkill, and saying so is wildly suspicious, IMO.

Very wildly.

All of this feels very sour grapey to me. I do not love people dumping info, but if it is done, then we have to make the best of it.

I do not mind a case. A case itself is not overkill. To me critiquing every action in a negative way is overkill.

Mojo wrote:

Exodus wrote:

Mojo wrote:When cases are built on info and not thread evidence they often do seem forced.

To me civvies should be capable of making a reasonable case driven by information.

Define reasonable

Well I am not sure a definition would make the point I am trying to make. My point is I feel that Shadowcat's case against me was taking nearly everything I did since the game began and giving a reason as to why it could be bad. It would have been much more reasonable if she summarized why she was suspicion and gave evidence. Or even analyzed both sides of things and came to a conclusion of it being scummy rather than saying she went into it open minded (paraphrased). Her post to me seemed to try too hard and came off forced which is why I don't find it reasonably civvie.

LINKI @Sunfire, how was a contradicting statement a silly reason to vote? I disagree and don't know why you're labeling that as silly. Quick, perhaps.

The Vision wrote:Questions for Exodus and Shadowcat:

Shadowcat, if your info, which I presume you think Exodus got as well, led you to believe he is bad, why would Exodus start the lynch agsinst tbird? He obv wasn't saving qs, so why go after the one guy that presumably he knew would lead you to suspect him by being the only one left but you? (If I'm guessing roughly correctly about what your info was)

Exodus, without going into details, can you say if you understand how shadowcat is coming to her conclusions? If yes, logically shouldn't you be as sure about HER baddieness as she is of you? And if not, what do you think of her actions today? How do you explain what she's doing?

I understand how she is coming to these conclusions. However, I was not as sure of her baddieness because I felt that the kill last night was rather suicidal and idiotic for the scum to make so I felt like something was going on behind the scenes that isn't as clear cut. But the more she posts, the more I feel like she is trying too hard to make her case feel like it has some sort of support within the thread. People are saying her post is solid, but I don't see it. I see it as spinning everything I say as bad. What is solid about that? Which is why I have now voted her.

Mojo wrote:When cases are built on info and not thread evidence they often do seem forced.

To me civvies should be capable of making a reasonable case driven by information.

Shadowcat wrote:

Exodus wrote:

Shadowcat wrote: How can you honestly be concerned about me? You've dropped my name in once, and it was a legitimate concern early on that I already addressed. This is only the second time you have voiced concerns on me, and it's after a giant wall-of-death post I made where I pull a bunch of quotes from you.

It's possible I may have had blinders on, yes. But I highly doubt I did. I wanted to see if I could find anything in your quotes that agreed with how I was feeling with you, and I found a gold mine.

Um, if I have what you have, why wouldn't I be concerned?! Are you seriously asking me this question? That just proves you're trying to fault everything I say. The answer should be clear as to why I would be concerned, to you most of all.
And I highly disagree that you found a gold mine. All you did was quote a post and make it look bad. Even a simple post where I expressed a thought was bad to you. You don't see that?

You're concerned because you're scrambling and disorganized. Seems like someone who is caught in a trap to me.

How is being concerned about you scrambling and disorganized?
Should I think you are townie when I have the same information that you do?
That just does not make sense and this is my problem with you, you're trying too hard to find whatever you can to suspect me with.

@Shadowcat,
First of all, when did I just roll over and give up? I am still posting, obviously. Can you not say I am giving up when clearly that isn't the case? I actually thought deadline was today. Guess I am too used to speed games here. But I am done responding to the post, yes, and I said why. Because I feel all you are doing is just taking anything I say and finding a way to classify it as baddie behavior. Am I somehow wrong to feel that's what you're doing? If I had done this to you, you would feel exactly the same, would you not? Because I see you not looking into different options like you claimed to have gone in with an open mind. I also said I will answer any questions if people have a question about something I have done or my behavior, but I feel replying to that post is a waste of time that I do not have. Is that really scummy of me? How should this make you feel better about your vote?

I do not have much experience with those who reread and what I do has taught me that rereading can be a simple way to change ones opinion rather than following the game to come to newly formed conclusions, so I did not think that the rereading was reason to drop my suspicion. Besides, had I dropped it there I am sure you would be saying I saw it was not going to work.

I am the type of player to suspect people, and also the type to change my mind as they reply. What is wrong with suspecting multiple players is beyond me. I do not think I just drop suspicion, have you really never played with people who scum hunt in this way? If it is foreign to you all, I don't know what to say to make you accept it. It's just how I play. I analyze posts and call attention to the things I find scummy and weird. Don't see why you're faulting me for that.

And I think there is a difference between nitpicking and analyzing, which I believe to be how scum hunting is done. Obviously you built a case, I just feel it is too forced at this point I don't understand why a civvie would do that. At least I could understand some interpretations, but he level in which you're doing it like I said, seemed forced.

Shadowcat wrote: How can you honestly be concerned about me? You've dropped my name in once, and it was a legitimate concern early on that I already addressed. This is only the second time you have voiced concerns on me, and it's after a giant wall-of-death post I made where I pull a bunch of quotes from you.

It's possible I may have had blinders on, yes. But I highly doubt I did. I wanted to see if I could find anything in your quotes that agreed with how I was feeling with you, and I found a gold mine.

Um, if I have what you have, why wouldn't I be concerned?! Are you seriously asking me this question? That just proves you're trying to fault everything I say. The answer should be clear as to why I would be concerned, to you most of all.
And I highly disagree that you found a gold mine. All you did was quote a post and make it look bad. Even a simple post where I expressed a thought was bad to you. You don't see that?

Domino wrote: Kind of like how QS threw out ideas and they were criticized the same way? Karma Baddie McBaddersons.

Stop accusing me of things you are not even sure if I did. I never criticized everything that QS did. This comparison is nothing but desperately trying to look like you're hunting and if people can not at least see that, I have no idea what else I can show them. The majority of my suspicion on QS was an emotional appeal where he apologized for doing anything confusing and basically admitting people had reason to suspect him because I would never do that as a civ.

And yes, you were agreeing QS be lynched the first time during the T Bird incident then brought up near the end how maybe you were wrong and QS shouldn't be voted out. I personally think it was to gain credibility the next day when he would most likely be voted out, and did. The problem I also have with you is you have been playing this while game so sneaky, and to me you're a Rat. You put forth a lot of effort to blend in and let your other minions stay low so they don't end up on the the lynch block. You put forth a lot of talk to gain Civ sides and keep your minions under the radar, until you got exposed by SC investigating. Hopefully you get voted out so we have one Baddie out under our belts and go for your other 6 henchmen next. You guys have done well to get all the attention off yourselves when convienent and onto others. You even tried to on me today, a day earlier than the vote. But why would I have anything to gain? I'd be a bad player exposing 3 of my teammates and myself but throwing your names out there and that would be half of the bad team. You're team is going to scramble to get any Civ they can to get votes not on you, and onto me and other players.
If Shadowcat were bad in my opinion, why would she have done all that research? Couldn't she have easily gone for a simple target such as Havok (who's name gets brought up every lynch) or the clue (Sunfire) as a target for today to make it "an easy kill" for the Baddies? I think her behavior is to be helpful and shed light so we actually get a lynch right for once. Sunfire jumped on the train fast to vote for me to make sure Exodus or himself/herself were alive to see another mutant day. Teammates IMO.

Lol whatever. Your post does not even have much logical content, you just are jumping on random ideas without proof, that I am letting my minions stay under the radar. Uh, what? If I were bad, how does that have anything to do with what my baddies are doing? That makes no sense. And I was the first to vote T-Bird, not that it's something to brag about but how does that make me agreeing with the QS lynch? I agreed with elements of the suspicion more so after T-Bird was lynched, actually. You're not even using thread evidence, you're just throwing accusations that do not make sense.
I think that it is possible for Shadowcat to do what she did as a baddie because if it means she gets to survive, wouldn't she want to give it her all? Nothing I am going to say is going to convince you, because you don't want to be convinced. Like, do you realize you're going to gain attention if I am voted out?

And, I did switch my vote to you, Shadowcat because I feel like you're just making stuff up trying to make me look bad and when I am not you get to go, oh no, something was wrong and live longer had I possibly brought you down like you most likely assumed I would.

Shadowcat wrote:Alright. To save you all a great deal of time. I'm doing the rest of this with links provided to each post. I figure that will save a good chunk of space from all the extra, unnecessary quotes.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62972

Here, he claims that Mojo initially agreed with Avalance about looking into defenders and defended Avalanche, but left himself with enough room to change his mind if need be. I took it simply as Mojo re-reading and gaining a fresh perspective on the situation, or discovering something he hadn't noticed before that convinced him to change his mind. I think Exodus is trying to either fabricate a case or move attention towards Mojo.

Or I was just being genuine in my thoughts, which is the case. There's nothing I can say except repeat what is in my post, and I find absolutely nothing wrong with it. Is it wrong for me to think that a turn around could be him taking advantage of someone who was in the spotlight, especially when I felt he was ignoring the fact that he actually agreed with a post he made? You're just reaching to make me fit this baddie profile. There is nothing wrong with this.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62974

I won't go too much into this, because I think Avalanche is good now and I've explained my feelings already, but at the time, I thought he wanted that option to win because he would gain some special ability or get a helpful item from it. But you go so far as to say I was trying to add fuel to the flames. I wasn't trying to start a riot, for crying out loud. Or be chaotic/antagonizing, to use your words.

Are you saying I accused you of being chaotic or antagonizing? Because I did not. I was referring to how I felt Avalanche was acting to explain why I disagreed with your opinion.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62978

Not really. I don't think anyone goes into a game wanting to get lynched on Day 1.

I was trying to point out the flaw I saw in Mojo's argument.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62980

"Uh oh. My case against Mojo isn't working out. I'll just say I misunderstood him and move on, and hopefully that drops it since this is still early in the game."

Actually, this isn't even dropping my case. You can see later on that I still do not feel good about him (which I think you did see, I haven't gotten to that yet). I was not going to argue over a statement that didn't make sense, my purpose of commenting on the statement was to express the flaws within it and show him how his logic wasn't correct (IMO). That is all. I continued to explain my statement, I did not back down on it, I was just saying, whatever, if you didn't mean it the way I took it, okay and moved on because what am I going to gain between going back and forth? People always accuse me of making big deals out of little things and I hate it so I try not to argue about things that could be meaningless and continue to observe their behavior for anything else that strikes me as scummy.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 320#p62983

This (and your following post 2 posts down) was the nail in the coffin for me. I think you were planning on using Mojo to take the fall if Avalanche had gotten lynched. And seeing that fail, you considered trying to direct more attention towards Mojo by fabricating/misinterpreting his thoughts. When that failed as well, you backed off rather wisely. Sounds like pretty scummy behavior to me.

All I can say is I did not see that his post was directed towards Avalanche's post and I took his clarification into mind. I didn't go to say, oh he's townie! I still stuck my my opinion that if he was using the logic I felt he was, it was flawed.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 360#p63038

This makes me wonder if his team was the one who silenced White Queen. It reads to me like a baddie who is trying to casually make a reference to something his team did, but wants to seem like a civvie who is making helpful/observational statements.

I actually got White Queen confused with another player which is why I thought it was suspicious when I saw her lurking and so when people brought to my attention that silencing did not work the way I imagined it did and so I commented on it. You can say this about anyone who has commented on the silencing, really. I fail to see how my comment is suspicious. It's kind of annoying when you're pulling apart every little thing I say just to prove your point when in the first place, you probably didn't even think it was scummy. I don't know if you're taking advantage of it or what but you're clearly forcing this stuff. Since I don't know you, I don't know how you'd work in this situation.

http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/viewto ... 400#p63050

"Oh look! Another victim...I mean person I could cast blame/doubt towards and try to get lynched!"

OR!!!! I could just be DISCUSSING opinions.
Seriously, how am I going to defend myself when even when I put forward ideas, they are criticized. I would continue defending myself but this is a waste of time and only irritating me. If anyone has any questions they can feel free to ask but I'm done responding to this post. If there's something you actually feel is scummy of me and not just could be scummy, I'll explain it but obviously you're forcing your points and anyone can see that.

The Vision wrote:

Exodus wrote: I am suspicious of Phoenix and Sunfire the most. I also thought Havoks vote was weird because he ignored my idea that all the votes in the same place was too convenient.

I decided to do my own readback thru Exodus, because anyone can put whatever slant they want on things if they're a good enough mafia player. More than anything, this post pings me. At no point prior to this post did he ever mention Sunfire. Not once. But in the heat of the last minute chaos, he not only was willing to suddenly switch his vote to Sunfire, but calls him suspicious.

This feels weird to me, and off.

@Exodus, I'm curious about one thing. I don't want you to say your real username or anything, but did you once play mafia at mafiascum? It's important to how I'm reading a certain something about your posts...

In the previous post by me, before the one you quoted, I commented on Dazzler noticing how he voted for Hawkeye and I said that I think it was a throwaway vote. I called it suspicious because to me it was and is suspicious.
But no I have never played on mafiascum.

Havok wrote: I actually have not felt so great about Exodus myself, but I have to ask. Of the two options you laid out, why are you leaning towards Exodus being my team mate? Have you read through all of Exodus's posts? I would say it is much more likely that Exodus was trying to buddy up to me obviously because I know my alignment is X-Men. But even just reading Exodus's posts would lead me there if I were looking at this from a 3rd party perspective.

This is from Night 2:

and then from day 3:

And then after this, Exodus completely drops me as a point of suspicion. It reads to me like Exodus gave up because his attempt to bring suspicion on me failed. So then he goes back to agreeing with me.

So, again, why do you lean towards Exodus and I being team mates?

Um, there was no buddy-ing up to you. How is agreeing with the comment about not understanding why people trusted Mojo buddying up to you when I expressed my own concerned of Mojo before that? It's called having an opinion. And obviously, if I am going to go to an extent of suspecting you, then it's not buddying up. Seriously, what sense does that make? As far as me "dropping" suspicion of you, what am I going to say when my suspicion was based on you voting for QS after ignoring my post? You dented seeing the post, I am not going to just argue back and force as to whether or not you saw my post. That is quite pointless, and so I filed it away and continued playing the game. I don't recall ever stopping the suspicion and going, oh I think he's town now.

Shadowcat wrote:

The Vision wrote:I'm intrigued by Shadowcats current, ongoing output towards Exodus, but I'm troubled about its origin. Shadowcat seems to be saying she got info about Exodus and is now trying to make a case to make her accusations "legit". If that's what going on, its not very cool... maybe I'm misreading?

That wasn't the intent. From some additional info I had, it made me start to think there was a good chance Exodus was bad. But I wanted to go back and re-read him because I felt that, in context, what he was saying would either confirm or eliminate my suspicions of him. In this case, however, it most certainly confirmed it for me.

And before I forget, votes Exodus.

Well the feeling is mutual as far as me being concerned about you, and I'm sure you know that. However, I'm a bit reluctant to take this as proof of you being bad because what you're assuming happened would mean the baddies made an idiotic and suicidal mistake. Why would the baddies do that? They surely wouldn't gain anything, so I am doubting that things are as easy as it seems. And as far as your case, which you're claiming to have confirmed your suspicions, I think it's quite obvious that you went into it looking for ways to make me scum. You've pointed out scummy sides to everything I've done, and even if I was scum, it wouldn't be that apparent, so you're trying too hard rather it be clouded judgement or trying to get me out before I get you out.

Domino wrote:Exodus you're alignment seems to be clear for your Baddie team. Everyone read Professor X's hint and you automatically try to throw the wool on people's eyes to get suspicion off her and onto me. Then, you vote for me followed by your teammate Sunfire. THAT is what I find interesting. If you were Civ I feel like you wouldn't be scrambling, especially this early when votes aren't due and already try to get someone else in the light that is Civ. After all, you campaigned well against QS to make sure attention stayed on him, why not try it on me as well now to save a Teammate of yours?

I never tried to take suspicion off of Sunfire. I found your posts to be clearly contradicting and that is a major way in which I scum hunt. Where does Professor X's role says he has power to find a baddie? No where. If Professor X had an actual power to find a baddie then I could see how your case could hold some kind of value, but he doesn't. At least not from my understanding, I even mentioned needing to check to see if he had a power to alignment check or if it was just an announcement aspect where a player goes based off their interpretations, which I've seen before. I was never scrambling, and I was never dead set on lynching you either but put my vote where I felt it belonged for the time being. You can change your votes and that is what I intended to do, if I felt it to be necessary. And I did not even campaign against QS making sure attention stayed on him, I was one of those who said it felt weird that all the votes were on him and there was no division, and I said it first. So clearly, you're either not reading the thread properly or you've decided to do whatever you can to make me look bad, and I'm guessing it's the latter.

Domino wrote:But to answer your question about Phoenix so you don't continue to throw attention back on me for not answering you and avoid you and Sunfire's attention: I felt like I was unsure when I first posted about Phoenix. Phoenix posted back after that and sounded very emotional and used the same line QS did about how "we will loose another Civ if she goes" and I didn't find that genuine. I was on the fence about her, but looking back at when she does actually post, she doesn't give much to me to now say I get Civ Vibes from her, especially the last post I just mentioned. I think the 3 I am looking at that I have a very good feeling are bad now are Sunfire, Phoenix, and Exodus. If you don't agree with me, oh well. But I'm most likely listening to the clue and voting Sunfire out first.

But you're rewriting what happened. My suspicion was not the opinion change, it was the fact that you tried to give off the impression that you were suspicious of her from the beginning by saying "I still think they are both bad". There is nothing that suggest new evidence from Phoenix's posts made you think she was bad, you wrote it as if it was there the entire time when it clearly wasn't.
And you're accusing me of trying to scramble and get votes off of Sunfire when you are the one who said it could be a reference to Phoenix. So that makes no sense.

Sunfire wrote:RIP Dazzler

Hawkeye wrote:

Mojo wrote:
Does prof x want us to look at sun fire?

That's how I interpreted it.

C'mon Professor X. I asked for some time to prove myself.

@ those who suspect me...what is it about me? I'd like to have a chance to persuade you otherwise. I good I tell ya....good!

I can't gather the posts right now but on day 2 (I think it was?) you didn't think QS was bad so you voted one of his voters, and you didn't give an explanation as to why, it was just a thrown out vote and that did not make sense to me. Then you came back to vote QS the next day, which isn't as bad but came off strange to me.

Domino wrote:Idk if Phoenix is good or not, but I def think the sun thing could be a reference to her as well. Phoenix was formed when the X Men were in space and the spirit of the Phoenix (a fire bird) possessed Jean Grey's body. So, if Prof X was trying to reference a clue, it's either vote. Phoenix or Sunfire out. We have to be cautious though for manipulation and try to get it right this time. We've lost too many civ teammates the past 3 days already

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

Think I am going to vote for Domino.

Havok wrote:I've been pinged by both of Domino's recent back to back posts. The first about phoenix just sounds odd. I think it's pretty obvious that Professor X was talking about Sunfire. Positing that sun actually meant Phoenix comes off as someone trying to get eyes away from Sunfire. Not saying that is what was happening as that would be pretty bold for Domino to be defending a team mate in such as obvious way, but that is how it read to me. And then the 2nd post about where the Sentinel kill came from that didn't even point out the secrets in the role also pinged me. And why would The Sentinels being recruited give them a kill?

On the phone AGAIN, smh. Thank god this isn't a speed game. I do not have enough time.
I agree with this, I was pinged by the post about Phoenix in addition to the fact she suspected the two major suspects or alternatives of last day. I also thought that how she started out the post was weird, by saying "I'm not sure if Phoenix is good or not". And she then said she thinks both are bad.

Domino wrote:

Havok wrote:agreed. I don't see where the Phoenix idea comes from. I think that if Professor X wanted to call out Phoenix over Sunfire, he wouldn't have used the word sun.

Just a thought. I still think they both are bad and see voting either out today to be a good option.

I'm slightly concerned at how you came into the game and now suspect the two people who were alternative lynching options to Quicksilver. While I suspect them myself, it feels like you might be going with the flow. I'll have to read your previous posts, I haven't fully caught up.

Phoenix wrote: None taken! I do see your point. However, I just found it to be a rather tenuous argument and very panicky from many people who may or may not have been trying to split up votes for the Magneto argument (it makes my head hurt!), and I happened to be the scapegoat. What I'm trying to decide is if

a) those who switched their votes in the last minute to me were genuinely trying to save the (as it is clear now good) Quicksilver by putting votes on me with the tenuous feelings argument, or

b) if they were baddies trying to fearmonger by putting suspicion on me while allowing enough votes for QS to be lynched, thereby attempting to kill two birds with one stone.

I'm leaning towards the first argument, and at this point I'm not inclined to vote to lynch those who were genuinely trying to save QS (as much I feel betrayed by my fellows. Sigh). They were (wrongly) guessing I was a baddie, so they clearly don't know who the baddies actually are. I suppose some could also be Indys, now that I think about it. Others have made an interesting argument about looking at people who voted QS early and stayed with him, but I'm not so sure about that either, as I voted for him and genuinely thought he was a baddie. I'll have to think on this more.

Glad that you're not offended. I'm always scared to accuse people of not being sincere, it hurts some peoples feelings!
As for the suspicion, perhaps some people were just tagging along to make you look suspicious but I personally was not, I found you suspicious before the whole voting even happened. I'll be interested to the conclusions you make, because if I am being honest I'm concerned that you don't really have any strong thoughts coming out of this. But I am willing to wait and see because I know some players take time and I don't want to jump too fast where I stop a civvie from actually reaching their potential if that makes sense. I just feel like I have at least some leads to look at in terms of certain players. What do you think about Sunfire? The switch from him to you?

@Vision, have you explained why you chose to go with Cable over someone with votes that would actually help out number half of Quicksilver's votes? I still do not get this considering you were the main person to bring up Magneto's power and were set on fighting it (which I have no problem with!). My problem lies within the fact that I don't feel your vote actually HELPED fight it.

LINKI: I agree. Prof X would have been foolish to use the word Sun. I need to reread his role again to see if this is one of those roles where he can have night information or if it's a role where you can announce your opinions in the thread, I forget.

Phoenix wrote:

Exodus wrote:

Phoenix wrote:Sorry, not silenced (again! just busy

Honestly, I went (wrongly) with my gut and threw my vote in the other direction of where my bleeding heart wasn't where it could actually count (towards T-bird. Yikes, that was a mouthful). At least for me, it wasn't part of any conspiracy that I was aware of. And trust me, I feel terrible about lynching one of my own RIP again Thunderbird

I'm not sure if I should retaliate and go the other direction and see if Quicksilver WAS the right way to go, but I think I'll wait til tomorrow when my head is clearer to vote. My gut doesn't do a very good job of finding scum so far...

I'm getting pretty suspicious of you, Phoenix.
This is becoming too repetitive to sound genuine. You keep mentioning how your gut was wrong (you do it multiple times in this post) and I remember you doing it in previous posts. I feel you're kind of excusing yourself when it isn't even necessary. To me, it comes across like you have a guilty conscience and know it is a matter time before someone calls you out so you want to defend yourself before people actually do. You also seem to be relying on emotions an awful lot, if it be not wanting to vote someone or reacting to someones death.

If you recall, I was called out on "going on my gut" by Rasputin earlier (he aptly asked what I would go on in response), so I did indeed feel a need to respond, apparently a little too strongly for several people. In the first few days, it would seem emotions are a lot of what can use to go upon when you can't know your comrades (logic is not much of an option at that point). Regardless, at least to me, isn't it usually a hallmark of goodness to actually have a bleeding heart? Baddies are rarely well known for their empathy/sympathy. Ah, well.

Well, I must have missed that but either way it does not change how I feel. I still get the feeling that you're playing up the emotional aspect of your posts as far as being sorry for making mistakes and trying to assure you won't do it again. I don't think that's wrong to associate with baddie behavior either, because of course baddies are going to appear sorry. My point is your emotional responses do not feel sincere, they are overly repetitive and I do think, at times, they aren't even needed (no offense!! this is just how it comes off to me).

RIP Dazzler.

Voting White Queen. Dropping by on phone. I'll be back later, sorry!

White Queen wrote:That is SO fucked up

OMG

I am glad we tried to move votes, and am sorry we did not move more.

Exactly my reaction! This sucks!! At least now those unwilling to move will be a bit more telling, I would think this means one of the candidates for switching has a good chance of being an actual baddie.

Havok wrote:lol I leave for a few hours and come back to see mayhem happened.

Exodus: I'm not sure what you are trying to get at?

What are you referring to? My post about you? I thought it was weird how when I brought up the idea that it was too convenient for almost all the voters to be voting for the same candidate, you came in and joined them without even taking my post into consideration.

Dazzler wrote:

Exodus wrote:

Dazzler wrote:

White Queen wrote:

Exodus wrote:I will change to Phoenix if y'all do. I will keep refreshing and waiting LOL

Done

Me too, fingers crossed one more person does in the next minute!

I did not think you were here to switch, phew!!! I am so nervous. lol

I'm not supposed to be here. I should be doing other stuff. But here I am...

Story of my life.

Dazzler wrote:Well, if nothing else, I think today has been very interesting and we've got a lot of options to discuss moving forward.

I agree. While last minute things are nerve-wracking, they lead good topics. I'll be up for discussing quite a few things tomorrow, such as Havo(ck?), Cable and Vision

Dazzler wrote:

White Queen wrote:

Exodus wrote:I will change to Phoenix if y'all do. I will keep refreshing and waiting LOL

Done

Me too, fingers crossed one more person does in the next minute!

I did not think you were here to switch, phew!!! I am so nervous. lol

ok i switched to Phoenix

White Queen wrote:

Exodus wrote:I will change to Phoenix if y'all do. I will keep refreshing and waiting LOL

Done

there's not enough to switch, switch back lol

Hawkeye wrote:

Dazzler wrote:

Hawkeye wrote:Fuck! 5 minutes. Do we change to Phoenix?

Well if none of the Sunfire voters change he's dead anyway so hopefully we're safe-ish?

I see Banshee changed his. I do not like what Vision just did though, and neither what Phoenix.

Right but I am confused why Vision would cause this stir and then not vote for someone that actually matters.

Oh ok. We don't need to move. But Phoenix's vote does not sit well with me.

I will change to Phoenix if y'all do. I will keep refreshing and waiting LOL

Phoenix wrote:Voting for Quicksilver, for reasons previously stated (and I'm running out of time! Oops...) Let's see if we're all right about this...

The Vision wrote:I'm going to vote Cable. He subs in and right away votes qs after the thread was asked not to, and then badgers in a time crunch. Ive never seen a civ sub in like that. Ive got to run, voting now.

I feel you but isn't that kind of wasting a vote? That's not going to stop the QS split that you're worried about. This makes me nervous!?

Dazzler wrote:

Exodus wrote:

The Vision wrote:I'm freaking out lol, twenty minutes to go and I have no idea where to put my vote. Reading back thru the ones you are mentioning...

Well I placed my vote on Sunfire because I thought I read some others who were willing to but if you want to place your vote on Phoenix I will switch to that too because I both find them to have pinged me. Two different types, Sunfire who feels like he made a contradiction and unexplained vote and then Phoenix who feels like she has a guilty conscience and is defending herself before even being accused

I had felt suspicious of Phoenix, just a gut thing, but didn't feel I could justify it. You do have a point though. I think I'll keep my vote on Sunfire for now actually, if we all keep changing them every minute leading up to the lynch it's gonna get crazy.

Linki - as in the day following the night they are targeted I'd assume Cable.

Well if we both changed to Phoenix we'd have more than Sunfire currently has lol

Linki unless hawkeye votes lol

The Vision wrote:I'm freaking out lol, twenty minutes to go and I have no idea where to put my vote. Reading back thru the ones you are mentioning...

Well I placed my vote on Sunfire because I thought I read some others who were willing to but if you want to place your vote on Phoenix I will switch to that too because I both find them to have pinged me. Two different types, Sunfire who feels like he made a contradiction and unexplained vote and then Phoenix who feels like she has a guilty conscience and is defending herself before even being accused

Cable wrote:I did read I have fresh eyes and yours are clouded.
If you cannot talk to me without disdain I might listen you act like I don't know what I am talking about.

The master of magnetism, Magneto targets one person at Night. On odd Nights, that person will receive the votes of two other selected targets the following Day. On even Nights, that person’s received votes may be halved and distributed evenly to two other selected targets.

Show me where it says its not the same person they target night 1.

They target 3 players night 1
(1 to get the votes 2 more to give votes to #1.)
They give their target 2 extra votes the following day
Then the same targets votes are halved the next day between 2 other people..

It says NOTHING about 2 different targets on odd/even nights.

I am staying with my vote and suspicion.

Because now you have to guess who the other two targets were that were picked.

Why wouldn't Magneto be able to change his targets between nights though?

Quicksilver wrote:I didnt feel like Phoenix was genuine when she posted "Oh my bleeding heart etc." And then showed up so sudden this vote and last. Not like I am going to survive, but i will vote her anyway and hope if the Magneto theory is true, it would backfire on them.

QS voted after this.

White Queen wrote:

Exodus wrote:

White Queen wrote:I could move to Sunfire, not sure how i feel about Spiral, or Havok.

What do you think about Phoenix?

I have not loved Phoenix' posts either, tbh. But we are in a balls to the walls situation.

Yeah, I am just trying to figure out which is the best option. And sadly, who will be able to get enough votes to override manipulation also matters.

White Queen wrote:I could move to Sunfire, not sure how i feel about Spiral, or Havok.

What do you think about Phoenix?

Well, it looks like most people are willing to change to Sunfire. I am willing to put my vote there.